Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
SUPREME
Manila
of
the
Philippines
COURT
EN BANC
G.R. No. 203766
April 2, 2013
x-----------------------x
G.R. No. 203958
KAPATIRAN NG MGA NAKULONG NA WALANG SALA, INC.
(KAKUSA), Petitioner,
vs.
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, Respondent.
x-----------------------x
G.R. No. 203960
1st CONSUMERS ALLIANCE FOR RURAL ENERGY, INC. (1CARE), Petitioner,
vs.
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS EN BANC, Respondent.
x-----------------------x
G.R. No. 203976
ALLIANCE FOR RURAL AND AGRARIAN RECONSTRUCTION,
INC.
(ARARO), Petitioner,
vs.
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, Respondent.
x-----------------------x
G.R. No. 203981
ASSOCIATION
FOR
RIGHTEOUSNESS
ADVOCACY
ON
LEADERSHIP (ARAL) PARTY-LIST, represented herein by Ms.
Lourdes
L.
Agustin,
the
partys
Secretary
General, Petitioner,
vs.
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, Respondent.
x-----------------------x
G.R. No. 204002
ALLIANCE
FOR
RURAL
CONCERNS, Petitioner,
vs.
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, Respondent.
x-----------------------x
G.R. No. 204094
ALLIANCE
FOR
NATIONALISM
AND
(ANAD), Petitioner,
vs.
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, Respondent.
DEMOCRACY
x-----------------------x
G.R. No. 204100
1-BRO PHILIPPINE GUARDIANS BROTHERHOOD, INC.,
(1BRO-PGBI)
formerly
PGBI, Petitioner,
vs.
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS EN BANC, Respondent.
x-----------------------x
G.R. No. 204122
1
GUARDIANS
NATIONALIST
PHILIPPINES,
INC.,
(1GANAP/GUARDIANS), Petitioner,
vs.
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS EN BANC composed of SIXTO
S. BRILLANTES, JR., Chairman, RENE V. SARMIENTO,
Commissioner,LUCENITO
N.
TAGLE,
Commissioner,ARMANDO C. VELASCO, Commissioner,ELIAS
R. YUSOPH, Commissioner, andCHRISTIAN ROBERT S. LIM,
Commissioner,Respondents.
x-----------------------x
G.R. No. 204125
vs.
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, Respondents.
x-----------------------x
G.R. No. 204158
ABROAD
PARTY
LIST, Petitioner,
vs.
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, CHAIRMAN SIXTO S.
BRILLANTES, JR., COMMISSIONERS RENE V. SARMIENTO,
ARMANDO C. VELASCO, ELIAS R. YUSOPH, CHRISTIAN
ROBERT S. LIM, MARIA GRACIA CIELO M. PADACA,
LUCENITO TAGLE, AND ALL OTHER PERSONS ACTING ON
THEIR BEHALF,Respondents.
x-----------------------x
G.R. No. 204174
AANGAT TAYO PARTY LIST-PARTY, represented by its
President
Simeon
T.
Silva,
Jr., Petitioner,
vs.
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS EN BANC, Respondent.
x-----------------------x
G.R. No. 204216
COCOFED-PHILIPPINE COCONUT PRODUCERS FEDERATION,
INC., Petitioner,
vs.
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, Respondent.
x-----------------------x
G.R. No. 204220
ABANG
LINGKOD
PARTY-LIST, Petitioner,
vs.
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS EN BANC, Respondent.
x-----------------------x
G.R. No. 204236
FIRM
24-K
ASSOCIATION,
vs.
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, Respondent.
INC., Petitioner,
x-----------------------x
G.R. No. 204238
ALLIANCE
OF
BICOLNON
PARTY
(ABP), Petitioner,
vs.
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS EN BANC, Respondent.
x-----------------------x
G.R. No. 204239
GREEN FORCE FOR THE ENVIRONMENT SONS AND
DAUGHTERS OF MOTHER EARTH (GREENFORCE),Petitioner,
vs.
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, Respondent.
x-----------------------x
G.R. No. 204240
AGRI-AGRA NA REPORMA PARA SA MAGSASAKA NG
PILIPINAS MOVEMENT (AGRI), represented by its Secretary
General,
Michael
Ryan
A.
Enriquez, Petitioner,
vs.
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS EN BANC, Respondent.
x-----------------------x
G.R. No. 204263
A BLESSED PARTY LIST A.K.A. BLESSEDFEDERATION OF
FARMERS
AND
FISHERMEN
INTERNATIONAL,
INC., Petitioner,
vs.
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, Respondent.
x-----------------------x
G.R. No. 204318
UNITED
MOVEMENT
AGAINST
DRUGS
FOUNDATION
(UNIMAD)
PARTY-LIST, Petitioner,
vs.
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, Respondent.
x-----------------------x
G.R. No. 204321
ANG AGRIKULTURA NATIN ISULONG (AANI), represented by
its Secretary General Jose C. Policarpio, Jr.,Petitioner,
vs.
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, Respondent.
x-----------------------x
G.R. No. 204323
BAYANI PARTYLIST as represented byHomer Bueno, Fitrylin
Dalhani,Israel de Castro, Dante Navarroand Guiling
Mamondiong, Petitioner,
vs.
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, CHAIRMAN SIXTO S.
BRILLANTES, JR., COMMISSIONERS RENE V. SARMIENTO,
LUCENITO N. TAGLE, ARMANDO C. VELASCO, ELIAS R.
YUSOPH, CHRISTIAN ROBERT S. LIM, and MARIA GRACIA
CIELO M. PADACA, Respondents.
x-----------------------x
G.R. No. 204341
ACTION LEAGUE OF INDIGENOUS MASSES(ALIM) PARTYLIST, represented herein by its President Fatani S. Abdul
Malik, Petitioner,
vs.
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, Respondent.
x-----------------------x
G.R. No. 204356
BUTIL
FARMERS
PARTY, Petitioner,
vs.
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, Respondent.
x-----------------------x
G.R. No. 204358
ALLIANCE OF ADVOCATES IN MININGADVANCEMENT FOR
NATIONAL
PROGRESS
(AAMA), Petitioner,
vs.
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS EN BANC, Respondent.
x-----------------------x
G.R. No. 204359
SOCIAL
MOVEMENT
FOR
ACTIVEREFORM
AND
TRANSPARENCY (SMART), represented by its Chairman,
Carlito
B.
Cubelo, Petitioner,
vs.
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS EN BANC, Respondent.
x-----------------------x
G.R. No. 204364
ADHIKAIN AT KILUSAN NG ORDINARYONG-TAO, PARA SA
LUPA, PABAHAY, HANAPBUHAY AT KAUNLARAN (AKO
BUHAY), Petitioner,
vs.
MGA
x-----------------------x
G.R. No. 204379
ALAGAD NG SINING (ASIN) represented by its President,
Faye
Maybelle
Lorenz, Petitioner,
vs.
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, Respondent.
x-----------------------x
G.R. No. 204394
ASSOCIATION OF GUARD UTILITY HELPER, AIDER, RIDER,
DRIVER/DOMESTIC HELPER, JANITOR, AGENT AND NANNY
OF
THE
PHILIPPINES,
INC.
(GUARDJAN), Petitioner,
vs.
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, Respondent.
x-----------------------x
G.R. No. 204402
KALIKASAN PARTY-LIST, represented by its President,
Clemente G. Bautista, Jr., and Secretary General, Frances
Q.
Quimpo, Petitioner,
vs.
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS EN BANC, Respondent.
x-----------------------x
G.R. No. 204408
PILIPINO ASSOCIATION FOR COUNTRY-URBAN POOR YOUTH
ADVANCEMENT
AND
WELFARE
(PACYAW),Petitioner,
vs.
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, Respondent.
x-----------------------x
G.R. No. 204410
1-UNITED TRANSPORT KOALISYON (1-UTAK), Petitioner,
vs.
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, Respondent.
x-----------------------x
G.R. No. 204421
x-----------------------x
G.R. No. 204435
1
ALLIANCE
ADVOCATING
AUTONOMY
(1AAAP), Petitioner,
vs.
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS EN BANC, Respondent.
PARTY
x-----------------------x
G.R. No. 204436
ABYAN ILONGGO PARTY (AI), represented byits Party
President,
Rolex
T.
Suplico, Petitioner,
vs.
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS EN BANC, Respondent.
x-----------------------x
G.R. No. 204455
MANILA TEACHER SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATION,
INC., Petitioner,
vs.
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS EN BANC, Respondent.
x-----------------------x
G.R. No. 204484
PARTIDO NG BAYAN ANG BIDA (PBB), represented by its
Secretary
General,
Roger
M.
Federazo,Petitioner,
vs.
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, Respondent.
x-----------------------x
G.R. No. 204485
ALLIANCE
OF
ORGANIZATIONS,
NETWORKS
ASSOCIATIONS
OF
THE
PHILIPPINES,
(ALONA),Petitioner,
vs.
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS EN BANC, Respondent.
AND
INC.
x-----------------------x
G.R. No. 204486
1st KABALIKAT NG BAYAN GINHAWANG SANGKATAUHAN
(1st
KABAGIS), Petitioner,
vs.
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, Respondent.
x-----------------------x
G.R. No. 204490
PILIPINAS
PARA
SA
PINOY
(PPP), Petitioner,
vs.
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS EN BANC, Respondent.
PERLAS-BERNABE,*
DECISION
CARPIO, J.:
The Cases
These cases constitute 54 Petitions for Certiorari and Petitions
for Certiorari and Prohibition1 filed by 52 party-list groups and
organizations assailing the Resolutions issued by the Commission
on Elections (COMELEC) disqualifying them from participating in
the 13 May 2013 party-list elections, either by denial of their
petitions for registration under the party-list system, or
cancellation of their registration and accreditation as party-list
organizations.
SPP
No.
Group
- A non-stock savings
and
loan
association
cannot
be
considered
marginalized
and
underrepresented; and
- The first and second
nominees
are
not
teachers
by
profession.
3 20442 12-011 Association
of
6
(PLM)
Local
Athletics
Entrepreneurs
and
Hobbyists,
Inc. (ALA-EH)
Failure
of
the
nominees
to
qualify:
although
registering
as a regional political
party,
two of the nominees
are
not
residents of the region;
and
four
of
the
five
nominees
do
not belong to the
marginalized
and
underrepresented.
- Failure to establish
that
the
group can represent
14
sectors; - The sectors
of
homeowners
associations,
entrepreneurs
and cooperatives are
not
marginalized
and
underrepresented; and
- The nominees do not
belong
to the marginalized
and
underrepresented.
- Failure to prove
membership base and
track
record;
- Failure to present
activities
that
sufficiently
benefited
its
intended constituency;
and
- The nominees do not
belong
to any of the sectors
which
the group
represent.
seeks
to
SPP
No.
Group
party
represents;
and
- The party failed to file
its
Statement
of
Contributions
and Expenditures for the
2010 Elections.
3 20398 12Association
for
1
187
Righteousness
(PLM) Advocacy
on
Leadership
(ARAL)
Cancelled
registration
and
accreditation
- Failure to comply, and
for
violation of election laws;
- The nominees do not
represent the sectors
which
the party represents;
and
- There is doubt that the
party
is organized for religious
purposes.
4 20400 12Alliance
for Cancelled
registration
2
188
Rural
Concerns and
(PLM) (ARC)
accreditation
- Failure of the nominees
to
qualify;
and
- Failure of the party to
prove
that majority of its
members
belong to the sectors it
seeks
to represent.
5 20431 12-
United
Cancelled
registration
220
Movement
(PLM) Against
Drugs
Foundation
(UNIMAD)
and
accreditation
- The sectors of drug
counsellors
and
lecturers,
veterans and the youth,
are
not marginalized and
underrepresented;
- Failure to establish
track
record;
and
- Failure of the nominees
to
qualify
as
representatives
of
the youth and young
urban
professionals.
Cancelled
registration
- Failure to define the
sector
it seeks to represent;
and
- The nominees do not
belong
to a marginalized and
underrepresented sector.
7 20412 121
Guardians
2
223
Nationalist
(PLM) Philippines, Inc.
(1GANAP/
GUARDIANS)
Cancelled
registration
- The party is a military
fraternity;
The
sector
of
community
volunteer workers is too
broad
to
allow
for
meaningful
representation;
and
- The nominees do not
appear
to belong to the sector of
community
volunteer
workers.
8 20426 12Blessed
257
Federation
of
(PLM) Farmers
and
Fishermen
International,
Inc.
(A
BLESSED
Party-List)
Cancelled
registration
- Three of the seven
nominees do not belong
to
the sector of farmers and
fishermen, the sector
sought
to be represented; and
- None of the nominees
are
registered
voters
of
Region
XI, the region sought to
be
represented.
Cancelled
registration
- The sector of rural
energy
consumers
is
not
marginalized
and
underrepresented;
- The partys track record
is
related
to
electric
cooperatives and not
rural
energy consumers; and
- The nominees do not
belong
to the sector of rural
energy
consumers.
Resolution dated 16 October 201228
1 20392 12Association
0 2
201
Philippine
(PLM) Electric
Cooperatives
(APEC)
of Cancelled
registration
and
accreditation
- Failure to represent a
marginalized
and
underrepresented sector;
and
- The nominees do not
belong
to the sector that the
party
claims to represent.
Tayo Cancelled
registration
Party and
accreditation
The
incumbent
representative
in
Congress
failed
to
author
or
sponsor
bills that are beneficial to
the
sectors that the party
represents
(women,
elderly,
youth, urban poor); and
- The nominees do not
belong
to
the
marginalized
sectors
that the party seeks to
represent.
Cancelled
registration
and
accreditation
- The interests of the
peasant
and urban poor sectors
that
the
party
represents
differ;
- The nominees do not
belong
to the sectors that the
party
seeks
to
represent;
- Failure to show that
three
of
the nominees are bona
fide
party
members;
and
- Lack of a Board
resolution
to participate in the
party-list
elections.
Cancelled
registration
- The party ceased to
exist
for
more
than
a
year
immediately
after the May 2010
elections;
- The nominees do not
belong
to the sector of peasants
and
farmers that
seeks
represent;
- Only four
were
submitted
COMELEC;
and
Failure
meaningful
activities
constituency.
1 20393 12Aksyon
4 6
248
Magsasaka(PLM) Partido Tinig ng
Masa
(AKMAPTM)
the party
to
nominees
to
the
to
show
for
its
Cancelled
registration
- Failure to show that
majority of its members
are
marginalized
and
underrepresented;
- Failure to prove that
four
of
its
nine
nominees
actually
belong to the farmers
sector;
and
- Failure to show that five
of
its nine nominees work
on
uplifting the lives of the
members of the sector.
1 20412 12Kaagapay
ng Cancelled
registration
5 6
263
Nagkakaisang
- The Manifestation of
(PLM) Agilang
Intent
Pilipinong
and
Certificate
of
Magsasaka
Nomination
(KAP)
were not signed by an
appropriate officer of the
party;
- Failure to show track
record
for the farmers and
peasants
sector;
and
- Failure to show that
nominees
actually
belong
to
the sector, or that they
have
undertaken meaningful
activities for the sector.
1 20436 12Adhikain
at
6 4
180
Kilusan
ng
(PLM) Ordinaryong
Tao
Para
sa
Lupa,
Pabahay,
Hanapbuhay at
Kaunlaran
(AKO-BAHAY)
Cancelled
registration
- Failure to show that
nominees
actually
belong
to
the sector, or that they
have
undertaken meaningful
activities for the sector.
1 20414 12The
True
7 1
229
Marcos Loyalist
(PLM) (for
God,
Country
and
People)
Association
of
the Philippines,
Inc. (BANTAY)
Cancelled
registration
- Failure to show that
majority of its members
are
marginalized
and
underrepresented;
and
- Failure to prove that
two
of
its nominees actually
belong
to the marginalized and
underrepresented.
1 20440 12Pilipino
8 8
217
Association
for
(PLM) Country Urban
Poor
Youth
Cancelled
registration
- Change of sector (from
urban poor youth to
urban
Advancement
poor) necessitates a new
and
Welfare application;
( PA C YAW )
- Failure to show track
record
for the marginalized and
underrepresented;
- Failure to prove that
majority of its members
and
officers are from the
urban
poor
sector;
and
- The nominees are not
members of the urban
poor
sector.
1 20415 12Pasang
Masda
9 3
277
Nationwide
(PLM) Party
(PASANG
MASDA)
Cancelled
registration
- The party represents
drivers
and operators, who may
have
conflicting interests; and
- Nominees are either
operators
or
former
operators.
2 20395 12Kapatiran
ng
0 8
015
mga
Nakulong
(PLM) na Walang Sala,
Inc. (KAKUSA)
Cancelled
registration
- Failure to prove that
na
Walang
Sala,
Inc.
(KAKUSA)
majority of its officers
and
members belong to the
marginalized
and
underrepresented;
The
incumbent
representative
in
Congress
failed
to
author
or
sponsor
bills that are beneficial to
the
sector that the party
represents
(persons
imprisoned without proof
of
guilt beyond reasonable
doubt);
- Failure to show track
record
for the marginalized and
underrepresented;
and
- The nominees did not
appear
to
be
marginalized
and
underrepresented.
Resolution dated 30 October 201232
2 20442 12Ang
Galing Cancelled
registration
1 8
256
Pinoy (AG)
and
(PLM)
accreditation
- Failure to attend the
summary
hearing;
- Failure to show track
record
for the marginalized and
underrepresented;
and
- The nominees did not
appear
to
be
marginalized
and
underrepresented.
Resolution dated 7 November 201233
2 20409 12Alliance
2 4
185
Nationalism
(PLM) Democracy
(ANAD)
for Cancelled
registration
and and
accreditation
- Failure to represent an
identifiable marginalized
and
underrepresented sector;
- Only three nominees
were
submitted
to
the
COMELEC;
- The nominees do not
belong
to
the
marginalized
and
underrepresented;
and
- Failure to submit its
Statement
of
Contribution
and Expenditures for the
2007 Elections.
Omnibus Resolution dated 7 November 201234
2 20423 12Green Force for
3 9
060
the Environment
(PLM) Sons
and
Daughters
of
Mother
Earth
(GREENFORCE)
Cancelled
registration
and
accreditation
- The party is an
advocacy
group and does not
represent
the marginalized and
underrepresented;
- Failure to comply with
the
track
record
requirement;
and
- The nominees are not
marginalized citizens.
2 20423 12Firm
24-K Cancelled
registration
4 6
254
Association, Inc. and
(PLM) (FIRM 24-K)
accreditation
- The nominees do not
belong to the sector that
the
party seeks to represent
(urban
poor
and
peasants
of
the
National
Capital
Region);
Only
two
of
its
nominees
reside in the National
Capital
Region;
and
- Failure to comply with
the
track
record
requirement.
2 20434 12Action
League Cancelled
registration
5 1
269
of
Indigenous and
(PLM) Masses (ALIM)
accreditation
- Failure to establish that
its
nominees are members
of
the
indigenous people in the
Mindanao and Cordilleras
sector that the party
seeks
to
represent;
- Only two of the partys
nominees reside in the
Mindanao
and
Cordilleras;
and
- Three of the nominees
do
not appear to belong to
the
marginalized.
Resolution dated 7 November 201235
2 20435 12Alliance
of
6 8
204
Advocates
in
(PLM) Mining
Advancement
for
National
Progress
(AAMA)
Cancelled
registration
- The sector it represents
is
a
specifically
defined
group
which
may
not
be
allowed
registration under the
party-list system; and
- Failure to establish that
the
nominees
actually
belong
to
the sector.
Cancelled
registration
- The nominees are
disqualified
from
representing the sectors
that
the party represents;
- Failure to comply with
the
track
record
requirement;
and
- There is doubt as to
whether
majority of its members
are
marginalized
and
underrepresented.
of Cancelled
registration
Party and
accreditation
- Defective registration
and
underrepresented
farmers
which
it
claims
to
represent;
and
- More than a majority of
the
partys nominees do not
belong to the farmers
sector.
Resolution dated 7 November 201240
3 20412 12Agapay
ng
1 5
292
Indigenous
(PLM) Peoples
Rights
Alliance,
Inc.
(A-IPRA)
Cancelled
registration
and
accreditation
- Failure to prove that its
five
nominees are members
of
the
indigenous
people
sector;
- Failure to prove that its
five
nominees
actively
participated
in
the
undertakings
of
the
party;
and
- Failure to prove that its
five nominees are bona
fide
members.
Cancelled
registration
and
accreditation
Inc. - The party is affiliated
with
private and government
Cancelled
registration
- Failure to establish a
track
record of continuously
representing the peasant
farmers
sector;
- Failure to show that its
members actually belong
to
the
peasant
farmers
sector;
and
- Failure to show that its
nominees
are
marginalized
and
underrepresented,
have
actively participated in
programs
for
the
advancement of farmers,
and
adhere to its advocacies.
Action
Cancelled
registration
4 8
158
Brotherhood for and
(PLM) Active
accreditation - Failure to
Dreamers,
Inc. show
that
the
(ABROAD)
party is actually able to
represent all of the
sectors
it
claims
to
represent;
- Failure to show a
complete
track
record
of
its
activities
since its registration; and
- The nominees are not
part
of any of the sectors
which
the
party
seeks
to
represent.
Cancelled
registration
and
accreditation
- The party receives
assistance
from
the
government through the
Department
of
Agriculture;
and
- Failure to prove that the
group is marginalized
and
underrepresented.
the
agriculture
and
cooperative
sectors are marginalized
and
underrepresented;
and
- The partys nominees
neither appear to belong
to
the sectors they seek to
represent, nor to have
actively participated in
the
undertakings
of
the
party.
Resolution dated 3 December 201246
3 20448 121st
Cancelled
registration
7 6
194
Kabalikat
ng and
(PLM) Bayan
accreditation
Ginhawang
Declaration
of
Sangkatauhan
untruthful
(1st
statements;
KABAGIS)
- Failure to exist for at
least
one
year;
and
- None of its nominees
belong to the labor,
fisherfolk,
and
urban
poor
indigenous
cultural
communities
sectors
which
it
seeks to represent.
Resolution dated 4 December 201247
3 20441 121-United
8 0
198
Transport
(PLM) Koalisyon
Cancelled accreditation
- The party represents
(1- drivers
UTAK)
Coalition
of
Senior
Citizens
in
the
Philippines, Inc.
(SENIOR
CITIZENS)
Cancelled
registration
- The party violated
election
laws
because
its
nominees
had
a
term-sharing
agreement.
SPP No.
Group
203818- 12-154
19
(PLM)
12-177
(PLM)
203981 12-187
(PLM)
204002 12-188
(PLM)
203922 12-201
(PLM)
Association
Cooperatives
(APEC)
203960 12-260
(PLM)
1st
Consumers Alliance for Rural Energy, Inc.
(1-CARE)
203936 12-248
(PLM)
203958 12-015
(PLM)
203976 12-288
(PLM)
Alliance
for
Reconstruction,
Inc. (ARARO)
of
Philippine
Rural
and
Electric
Agrarian
204125 12-292
(PLM)
204100 12-196
(PLM)
204141 12-229
(PLM)
God,
the
Inc.
204240 12-279
(PLM)
204216 12-202
(PLM)
204158 12-158
(PLM)
203766 12-161
(PLM)
204318 12-220
(PLM)
United
Movement
Foundation
(UNIMAD)
204263 12-257
(PLM)
204174 12-232
(PLM)
204126 12-263
(PLM)
Kaagapay ng Nagkakaisang
Pilipinong
Magsasaka (KAP)
204364 12-180
(PLM)
Against
Drugs
Agilang
204139 12-127
(PL)
204220 12-238
(PLM)
Abang
Lingkod
LINGKOD)
204236 12-254
(PLM)
204238 12-173
(PLM)
204239 12-060
(PLM)
204321 12-252
(PLM)
204323 12-210
(PLM)
204341 12-269
(PLM)
Action
(ALIM)
204358 12-204
(PLM)
Alliance
of
Advocates
in
Advancement
for National Progress (AAMA)
204359 12-272
(PLM)
204356 12-136
(PLM)
League
Party-List
of
Indigenous
(ABANG
Masses
Mining
204394 12-145
(PL)
204408 12-217
(PLM)
204428 12-256
(PLM)
204490 12-073
(PLM)
204379 12-099
(PLM)
204367 12-104
(PL)
204426 12-011
(PLM)
Association
of
Local
Entrepreneurs
and Hobbyists, Inc. (ALA-EH)
204455 12-041
(PLM)
204374 12-228
(PLM)
204370 12-011
(PP)
204435 12-057
(PLM)
204486 12-194
(PLM)
204410 12-198
(PLM)
204421, 12-157
204425 (PLM)
12-191
(PLM)
Athletics
and
in
Loan
the
204436 12-009
(PP),
12-165
(PLM)
204485 12-175
(PL)
204484 11-002
The Issues
We rule upon two issues: first, whether the COMELEC committed
grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of
jurisdiction in disqualifying petitioners from participating in the 13
May 2013 party-list elections, either by denial of their new
petitions for registration under the party-list system, or by
cancellation of their existing registration and accreditation as
party-list organizations; and second, whether the criteria for
participating in the party-list system laid down in Ang Bagong
Bayani and Barangay Association for National Advancement and
Transparency v. Commission on Elections49 (BANAT) should be
applied by the COMELEC in the coming 13 May 2013 party-list
elections.
The Courts Ruling
We hold that the COMELEC did not commit grave abuse of
discretion in following prevailing decisions of this Court in
disqualifying petitioners from participating in the coming 13 May
2013 party-list elections. However, since the Court adopts in this
Decision new parameters in the qualification of national, regional,
and sectoral parties under the party-list system, thereby
abandoning the rulings in the decisions applied by the COMELEC
in disqualifying petitioners, we remand to the COMELEC all the
present petitions for the COMELEC to determine who are qualified
The 1987 Constitution and R.A. No. 7941 allow major political
parties to participate in party-list elections so as to encourage
them to work assiduously in extending their constituencies to the
"marginalized and underrepresented" and to those who "lack welldefined political constituencies." The participation of major
political parties in party-list elections must be geared towards the
entry, as members of the House of Representatives, of the
"marginalized and underrepresented" and those who "lack welldefined political constituencies," giving them a voice in lawmaking. Thus,to participate in party-list elections, a major political
party that fields candidates in the legislative district elections
must organize a sectoral wing, like a labor, peasant, fisherfolk,
urban poor, professional, women or youth wing, that can register
under the party-list system.
Such sectoral wing of a major political party must have its own
constitution, by-laws, platform or program of government, officers
and members, a majority of whom must belong to the sector
represented. The sectoral wing is in itself an independent sectoral
party, and is linked to a major political party through a coalition.
This linkage is allowed by Section 3 of R.A. No. 7941, which
provides that "component parties or organizations of a coalition
may participate independently (in party-list elections) provided
the coalition of which they form part does not participate in the
party-list system."
Section 9 of R.A. No. 7941 prescribes the qualifications of partylist nominees. This provision prescribes a special qualification only
for the nominee from the youth sector.
Section 9. Qualifications of Party-List Nominees. No person shall
be nominated as party-list representative unless he is a naturalborn citizen of the Philippines, a registered voter, a resident of the
Philippines for a period of not less than one (1) year immediately
preceding the day of the election, able to read and write, a bona
fide member of the party or organization which he seeks to
represent for at least ninety (90) days preceding the day of the
election, and is at least twenty-five (25) years of age on the day
of the election.
T.
CARPIO
WE CONCUR:
MARIA
Chief Justice
LOURDES
P.
A.
SERENO
PRESBITERO
VELASCO,
Associate Justice
J.
JR.
TERESITA J. LEONARDODE
CASTRO
Associate Justice
ARTURO
D.
Associate Justice
BRION
DIOSDADO M. PERALTA
Associate Justice
LUCAS
P.
BERSAMIN
Associate Justice
MARIANO
C.
CASTILLO
Associate Justice
ROBERTO
A.
Associate Justice
MARTIN S. VILLARAMA,
JR.
Associate Justice
ABAD
DEL
JOSE
C.
MENDOZA
Associate Justice
BIENVENIDO L.
Associate Justice
(on
leave)
ESTELA
M.
PERLASBERNABE*
Associate Justice
MARVIC
MARIO
Associate Justice
REYES
VICTOR
F.
LEONEN
CERTIFICATION
Pursuant to Section 13, Article VIII of the Constitution, I certify
that the conclusions in the above Decision had been reached in
consultation before the case was assigned to the writer of the
opinion of the Court.
MARIA
Chief Justice
LOURDES
P.
A.
SERENO
Footnotes
Under Rule 64 in relation to Rules 65 of the 1997 Rules of
Civil Procedure.
1
Id.
Id.
Rollo (G.R. No. 204455), pp. 38-55; rollo (G.R. No. 204426),
pp. 127-144. Signed by Chairman Sixto S. Brillantes, Jr. and
Commissioners Rene V. Sarmiento, Christian Robert S. Lim,
and Maria Gracia Cielo M. Padaca, with Commissioners
Lucenito N. Tagle and Elias R. Yusoph dissenting;
9
Rollo (G.R. No. 203766), pp. 75-99; rollo (G.R. No. 203981),
pp. 47-70; rollo (G.R. No. 204002), pp. 53-76; (G.R. No.
204318), pp. 23-46. Signed by Chairman Sixto S. Brillantes,
Jr. and Commissioners Lucenito N. Tagle, Armando C.
Velasco, Elias R. Yusoph, and Christian Robert S. Lim.
Commissioner Rene V. Sarmiento also voted in favor.
Commissioner Maria Gracia Cielo M. Padaca took no part.
25
Rollo (G.R. No. 204240), pp. 47-69; rollo (G.R. No. 203936),
pp. 128-150; rollo (G.R. No. 204126), pp. 51-73; rollo (G.R.
No. 204364), pp. 34-56; rollo (G.R. No. 204141), pp. 31-53;
rollo (G.R. No. 204408), pp. 46-68; rollo (G.R. No. 204153),
pp. 24-46; rollo (G.R. No. 203958), pp. 26-48. Signed by
Chairman Sixto S. Brillantes, Jr. and Commissioners Rene V.
Sarmiento, Lucenito N. Tagle. Armando C. Velasco.
Commissioner Elias R. Yusoph also voted in favor.
Commissioner Christian Robert S. Lim also concurred but
inhibited in KAKUSA. Commissioner Maria Gracia Cielo M.
Padaca took no part.
31
Rollo (G.R. No. 204421), pp. 43-50; rollo (G.R. No. 204425),
pp. 21-28. Signed by Chairman Sixto S. Brillantes, Jr. and
Commissioners Rene V. Sarmiento, Christian Robert S. Lim,
and Maria Gracia Cielo M. Padaca with Commissioners
Lucenito N. Tagle, Armando C. Velasco, and Elias R. Yusoph,
dissenting.
48
54
59
61
Id. at 251.
xxx
xxx
This is most significant at this period in our national life when the
nation is bleeding under the forces of hatred and violence,
brothers fighting against brothers, Filipinos torturing and killing
their own countrymen. Without love, there can be no peace.
The new Charter establishes a republican democratic form of
government with three branches each independent and coequal
of each affording a check and balance of powers. Sovereignty
resides in the people.
xxx
xxx
xxx
For the first time, and possibly this is the first and only
Constitution which provides for the creation of a Commission on
Human Rights entrusted with the grave responsibility of
investigating violations of civil and political right by any party or
groups and recommending remedies therefor. The new Charter
also sets forth quite lengthily provisions on economic, social and
cultural rights spread out in separate articles such as the Articles
on Social Justice, Education and Declaration of Principles. It is a
document which in clear and in unmistakable terms reaches out
to the underprivileged, the paupers, the sick, the elderly,
disabled, veterans and other sectors of society. It is a document
which opens an expanded improved way of life for the farmers,
the workers, fishermen, the rank and file of those in service in the
government. And that is why I say that the Article on Social
Justice is the heart of the new Charter. 2 (Emphasis supplied)
That is why Section 1, Article XIII, provides that: "The Congress
shall give highest priority to the enactment of measures that
protect and enhance the right of all the people to human dignity,
reduce social, economic, and political inequalities, and remove
cultural inequities by equitably diffusing wealth and political
power for the common good."3 As explained by this Court:
Further, the quest for a better and more "equal" world calls for the
use of equal protection as a tool of effective judicial intervention.
Equality is one ideal which cries out for bold attention and action
in the Constitution. The Preamble proclaims "equality" as an ideal
xxx
xxx
xxx
xxx
xxx
xxx
xxx
xxx
Commissioner Jaime Tadeo explained the circumstances the partylist system sought to address:10
MR. TADEO: Ang Cory government ay iniakyat ng peoples
power. Kaya kami naririto sa Con-Com ay dahil sa peoples power
nasa amin ang people, wala sa amin ang power. Ganito ito
kahalaga.
The Legislature is supposed to implement or give flesh to the
needs and aspirations of the Filipino people.
Ganoon kahalaga and National Assembly kayat napakahalaga
noong Section 5 and Section 31 ng ating Constitution. Our
experience, however, has shown that legislation has tended to
benefit more the propertied class who constitutioes a small
minority in our society than the impoverished majority, 70
percent of whom live below the poverty line. This has come about
because the rich have managed to dominate and control the
legislature, while the basic sectors have been left out of it. So, the
critical question is, how do we ensure ample representation of
basic sectors in the legislature so that laws reflect their needs
and aspirations?
RA 7941 was enacted pursuant to the party-list provisions of the
1987 Constitution. Not only is it a "social justice tool", as held
in Ang Bagong,11 but it is primarily so. This is not mere
semantics but a matter of legal and historical accuracy with
material consequences in the realm of statutory interpretation.
The ponencia gives six (6) parameters that the COMELEC should
adhere to in determining who may participate in the coming 13
May 2013 and subsequent party-list elections. I shall discuss
below my position in relation to the second, fourth and sixth
parameter enunciated in the ponencia.
"Marginalized and underrepresented" under Section 2 of
RA 7941 qualifies national, regional and sectoral parties or
organizations.
Ran Party-list
k
group
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Votes
Garnere
d
2nd
1st Round
Round
(guarante
(guarante
ed
ed
seats)
seats)
Total
#
Of
seats
AAA
1,466,00 7.33 1
0
%
BBB
1,228,00 6.41 1
0
%
CCC
1,040,00 4.74 1
0
%
DDD
1,020,00 3.89 1
0
%
EEE
998,000 3.88 1
%
FFF
960,000 3.07 1
%
GGG
942,000 2.92 1
%
HHH
926,000 2.65 1
%
910,000 2.57 1
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
III
%
1
JJJ
796,000 2.57 1
%
KKK
750,000 2.42 1
%
LLL
738,000 2.35 1
%
MMM
718,000 2.32 1
%
NNN
698,000 2.13 1
%
OOO
678,000 2.12 1
%
PPP
658,000 2.06 1
%
QQQ
598,000 2.02 1
%
RRR
482,000 1.95
%
SSS
378,000 1.89
%
TTT
318,000 1.54
%
UUU
294,000 1.47
%
VVV
292,000 1.44
%
WWW
290,000 1.43
%
XXX
280,000 1.37
%
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
YYY
274,000 1.37
%
ZZZ
268,000 1.34
%
I-A
256,000 1.24
%
I-B
248,000 1.23
%
I-C
238,000 1.18
%
I-D
222,000 1.11
%
I-E
214,000 1.07
%
I-F
212,000 1.06
%
I-G
210,000 1.05
%
I-H
206,000 1.03
%
I-I
194,000 1.02
%
33
50
20,000,0
00
17
LOURDES
P.
A.
SERENO
Footnotes
1
Emphasis supplied.
Puno, 265.
10
Id.
11
13
16
18
Id.
19
20
22
23
24
25
Supra.
26
27
31
33
36
on
Ang
Bagong
Bayani
and
its
b. Banat
D. The Party-list System of elections under the
constitution and RA 7941: Revisiting Ang Bagong
Bayani and its errors
a. The Aim or Objective of the Party-List System
a.1. From the Constitutional Perspective.
a.2. From the statutory perspective
b. Party participation under the party-list system
b.1. Impact on political parties
c. The parties and their nominees
c.1. Refusal or cancellation of registration due
to nominee problems
c.2. party nominee relationship
E. Chief Justice Serenos Reflections
F. The Eleven-Point Parameters for COMELEC Action
I.A The Cases
The Court resolves fifty-three (53) consolidated petitions for
certiorari/prohibition filed under Rule 64 of the Rules of Court by
various party-list groups and organizations. They commonly assail
the COMELECs resolutions, either cancelling their existing
registrations and accreditations, or denying their new petitions for
party-list registration.
Of the 53 petitions, thirteen (13) were instituted by new party-list
applicants under Republic Act (RA) No. 7941 and COMELEC
Resolution No. 9366 (dated February 21, 2012). These petitions
were denied by the COMELEC En Banc upon its review of the
COMELEC Divisions resolutions.
under its First Guideline, Ang Bagong Bayani solely viewed the
party-list system from the prism of social justice, and not from the
prism of electoral reform as the framers of the Constitution
originally intended.
Second. In the constitutional deliberations, the proponents of the
electoral reform concept were opposed by those who wanted a
party-list system open only to sectoral representation, particularly
to sectoral groups with social justice orientation.
The oppositors were defeated, but the proponents nevertheless
opened the system to sectoral representation and in fact gave the
social justice groups a head-start by providing for their
representation through selection in the first three elections.
In the resulting approved wording, the Constitution made a
textual commitment to open the party-list system to registered
national, regional and sectoral parties or organizations. The
Article on the Commission on Election also pointedly provided that
there shall be a "free and open party system," and votes for
parties, organizations or coalitions shall only be recognized in the
party-list system.
II.A.2. Effects on the Components of the Party-list System
Ang Bagong Bayani admits that even political parties may run in
the party-list elections but maintains under its Second Guideline
that they must qualify as marginal and underrepresented as this
phrase is understood in the social justice context. This is totally
incorrect.
Based on the reasons discussed above and further expounded
below, even major political parties can participate in party-list
elections because the party-list system is open to all registered
political, national, regional, sectoral organizations and parties,
subject only to the limitations imposed by the Constitution and by
law. Further, both political and sectoral parties have equal roles
and participation in the party-list system; again, they are subject
to the same limitations imposed by law (the Constitution and RA
what the text and intents of the Constitution and RA No. 7491
provide, yield a result different from what Ang Bagong Bayani
reached.
As will be discussed extensively in this Separate Opinion, wrong
considerations were used in ruling on the consolidated petitions,
resulting in gross misinterpretation and misapplication of the
Constitution. This is grave abuse of discretion that taints a
decision makers action,4 infinitely made worse in this case
because the Constitution itself is involved.
An added basis for a finding of grave abuse of discretion pertains
specifically to the COMELECs refusal or cancellation of
registration of the party-list group based, solely or partly, on the
disqualification of the nominee. As discussed below, this action
and any refusal or cancellation of registration is completely
devoid of basis in fact and in law and in this sense constitutes
grave abuse of discretion.
In these lights, I vote for the REMAND of ALL the petitions to the
COMELEC in accordance with the terms of this Separate Opinion.
III. PRELIMINARY MATTERS
A. The existence of jurisdictional error that warrants reviewing
COMELECs action
Whether acting in the exercise of its purely administrative power,
on one hand, or quasi-judicial powers, on the other hand, the
judicial remedy available to an aggrieved party is the remedy of
certiorari under Rule 64, in relation with Rule 65. Court action
under this rule is rendered necessary by the reality that, by law,
the COMELEC en banc decision is final and executory and should
stand unless nullified by this Court through a writ of certiorari.
For the writ of certiorari to issue, the Rules of Court expressly
require that the tribunal must have acted without or in excess of
its jurisdiction, or with grave abuse of discretion amounting to
lack or excess of jurisdiction. The requisite grave abuse of
discretion is in keeping with the office of the writ of certiorari; its
and
qualification
for
party-list
RA No. 7941
disqualification.
specified
and
defined
the
grounds
for
C. Jurisprudential Developments
a. The Ang Bagong Bayani Case
In 2001, the first judicial test in the implementation of the partylist system came through the Ang Bagong Bayani case where the
petitioners sought the disqualification of the private respondents,
among whom were major political parties. The Court resolved,
among others, the following issues:
1. whether political parties may participate in party-list elections;
and
2. whether the party-list system is exclusive to "marginalized and
underrepresented" sectors and organizations.
The majority ruling held that political parties may participate in
party-list elections, provided that the requisite character of these
parties or organizations must be consistent with the Constitution
and RA No. 7941. The party-list organization or party must
factually
and
truly
represent
the
marginalized
and
underrepresented
constituencies,
identifying
them,
nonexclusively, as the labor, peasant, fisherfolk, urban poor,
indigenous cultural communities, elderly, handicapped, women,
youth, veterans, overseas workers, and professionals. The partylist nominees, as well, must be Filipino citizens belonging to
marginalized and underrepresented sectors, organizations and
parties.
Based on its conclusions, the majority provided the guidelines for
the party-list system, summarized below:
First, the political party, sector, organization or coalition must
represent the marginalized and underrepresented groups
identified in Section 5 of RA 7941. In other words, it must show
through its constitution, articles of incorporation, bylaws, history,
platform of government and track record that it represents and
The minority view22 took the position that neither the Constitution
nor RA No. 7941 prohibits major political parties from participating
in the party-list system. It maintained that, on the contrary, the
framers of the Constitution clearly intended the major political
parties to participate in party-list elections through their sectoral
wings, and this Court cannot engage in socio-political engineering
and judicially legislate the exclusion of major political parties from
party-list elections, in patent violation of the Constitution and the
law.
Moreover, the minority maintained that the Party-List System Act
and the deliberations of the Constitutional Commission state that
major political parties are allowed to coalesce with sectoral
organizations for electoral or political purposes. The other major
political parties can thus organize or affiliate with their chosen
sector or sectors, provided that their nominees belong to their
respective sectors. Nor is it necessary that the party-list
organizations nominee "wallow in poverty, destitution, and
infirmity," as there is no financial status or educational
requirement in the law. It is enough that the nominee of the
sectoral party belongs to the marginalized and underrepresented
sectors; that is, if the nominee represents the fisherfolk, he must
be a fisherfolk, if the nominee represents the senior citizens, he
must be a senior citizen.
D. The Party-list System of elections under the constitution and RA
7941: Revisiting Ang Bagong Bayani and its errors
I opened these Discussions by quoting the plain terms of the
Constitution and of the law to stress these terms for later
comparison with Ang Bagong Bayani. In this manner, Ang Bagong
Bayanis slanted reading of the Constitution and the laws can be
seen in bold relief. Its main mistake is its erroneous reading of the
constitutional intent, based on the statements of a constitutional
commissioner that were quoted out of context, to justify its
reading of the constitutional intent. 23 Specifically, it relied on the
statements of Commissioner Villacorta, an advocate of sectoral
representation, and glossed over those of Commissioner Monsod
and the results of the deliberations, as reflected in the resulting
words of the Constitution.24 Thus, its conclusion is not truly
you
very
much.35 (emphases
and
party obtain the required number of votes. In fact, once the partylist group submits the list of its nominees, the law provides
specific grounds for the change of nominees or for the alteration
of their order of nomination. While the nominee may withdraw his
nomination, we ruled it invalid to allow the party to withdraw the
nomination it made43 in order "to save the nominee from falling
under the whim of the party-list organization once his name has
been submitted to the COMELEC, and to spare the electorate from
the capriciousness of the party-list organizations." 44
We also recognize the importance of informing the public who the
nominees of the party-list groups are as these nominees may
eventually be in Congress. 45 For the nominees themselves, the
law requires that:
1. he has given his written consent to be a nominee;
2. he must be a natural-born citizen of the Philippines;
3. he must be a registered voter, a resident of the Philippines
for a period of not less than one (1) year immediately
preceding the day of the election;
4. he must be able to read and to write;
5. he must be a bona fide member of the party or
organization which he seeks to represent for at least ninety
(90) days preceding the day of the election; and
6. he must be at least twenty-five (25) years of age on the
day of the election.
From this list, what clearly serves as the legal link between the
party and its nominee is only the latters bona fide membership in
the party that wishes to participate in the party-list system of
election. Because of this relationship, membership is a fact that
the COMELEC must be able to confirm as it is the link between the
party the electorate votes for and the representation that the
nominee
subsequently
undertakes
in
the
House
of
Representatives. To illustrate, if a sectoral partys nominee, who
entity, with the fault attributable and affecting only the nominee,
producing disastrous effects on the otherwise qualified collective
merit of the party. If their identification with one another can be
considered at all, it is in the ideal constitutional sense that one
ought to be a reflection of the other i.e., the party-list group acts
in Congress through its nominee/s and the nominee in so acting
represents the causes of the party in whose behalf it is there for.
E. Observations on Chief Justice Serenos Reflections.
Essentially, the Reflections defend the Ang Bagong Bayani ruling
and do not need to be further discussed at this point lest this
Opinion be unduly repetitious. One point, however, that needs to
be answered squarely is the statement that this Separate Opinion
is not "appropriately sensitive to the context from which it the
1987 Constitution arose." The Reflections asserted that the heart
of the 1987 Constitution is the Article on Social Justice," citing, in
justification, the statements endorsing the approval of the 1987
Constitution, particularly those of Commissioner Cecilia Munoz
Palma, the President of the 1986 Constitutional Commission;
President Munoz Palma described the Constitution as reaching out
to the social justice sectors.
These cited statements, however, were endorsements of the
Constitution as a whole and did not focus solely on the electoral
reform provisions. As must be evident in the discussions above, I
have no problem in accepting the social justice thrust of the 1987
Constitution as it indeed, on the whole, shows special concern for
social justice compared with the 1935 and the 1973 Constitution.
The Reflections, however, apparently misunderstood the thrust of
my Separate Opinion as already fully explained above.
This Separate Opinion simply explains that the provisions under
consideration in the present case are the Constitutions electoral
provisions, specifically the elections for the House of
Representatives and the nations basic electoral policies
(expressed in the Article on the Commission on Elections) that the
constitutional framers wanted to reform.
D.
BRION
Footnotes
1
This stance reflects both respect for Congress' role and the
need to preserve the courts' limited resources.
Information Technology Foundation of the Philippines v.
Commission on Elections, G.R. No. 159139, January 13, 2004.
8
11
Id. at 219.
xxxx
x x x The ascertainment of that intent is but in keeping with
the fundamental principle of constitutional construction that
the intent of the framers of the organic law and of the people
adopting it should be given effect. The primary task in
constitutional construction is to ascertain and thereafter
assure the realization of the purpose of the framers and of
the people in the adoption of the Constitution. It may also be
safely assumed that the people in ratifying the Constitution
were guided mainly by the explanation offered by the
framers. [italics, emphasis and underscore supplied]
The deliberations, together with voting on the various
issues raised and the wording of the constitutional text of
the party-list provision, took place on July 22, 1986, July 25,
1986 and August 1, 1986.
13
14
15
16
Id. at 259.
17
18
19
G.R. Nos. 179271 and 179295, April 21, 2009, 586 SCRA
210.
21
22
25
26
II RECORD of the Constitutional Commission, pp. 255, 561562. See also the Dissents of Justice Jose C. Vitug and Justice
Vicente Mendoza in Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party v.
COMELEC, supra note 4.
27
28
29
30
Supra note 4.
31
Id. at 333.
views of the large majority who did not talk, much less of the
mass of our fellow citizens whose votes at the polls gave
that instrument the force of fundamental law. We think it
safer to construe the constitution from what appears upon its
face." The proper interpretation therefore depends more on
how it was understood by the people adopting it than in the
framers' understanding thereof. (Id.)
35
36
Id. at 252.
38
41
44
Ibid.
48
Article
THE LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT
VI
In AGRIs45 case, the COMELEC ruled that: (1) for more than a year
immediately after the May 2010 elections, AGRI stopped existing
as an organization, and this constitutes as a ground to cancel
registration under Section 6 of RA 7941; (2) its nominees did not
appear
to
actually
belong
to
the
marginalized
and
underrepresented sectors of peasants and farmers, which the
party seeks to represent; (3) it submitted a list of only four
nominees, instead of five as mandated by Section 8 of RA 7941;
and (4) there is no showing that it undertook meaningful activities
for the upliftment of its constituency.
AKMA-PTMs46 registration as a party to represent the farmers
sector was cancelled for its failure to show that majority of its
members and officers belonged to the marginalized and
underrepresented. There was also no proof that its first to fourth
nominees,47 who were an educator and persons engaged in
business,
actually
belonged
to
a
marginalized
and
underrepresented sector. Its fifth to ninth nominees, although all
farmers, had not been shown to work on uplifting the lives of the
members of their sector.
The COMELEC cancelled the registration of KAP 48 (formerly Ako
Agila ng Nagkakaisang Magsasaka, Inc. Ako Agila) on the
following grounds: (1) its Manifestation of Intent and Certificate of
Nomination were not signed by an appropriate officer of the party,
as required by Section 3, Rule 2 of Resolution No. 9366; (2) it
failed to show that it has continued to work for the betterment of
the lives of the members of the sectors it represents, i.e. farmers
and peasants; and (3) it failed to show that its nominees actually
belong to the sectors which the party represents, or that they
have undertaken meaningful activities which address the
concerns of said sectors.
The COMELEC cancelled the registration of AKO BAHAY 49 for its
failure to prove that its nominees actually belong to the
marginalized and underrepresented sector that the party seeks to
represent, i.e., the urban poor, or to have engaged in meaningful
activities that tend to uplift and enrich the lives of the members
of said sector.
xxxx
In Sections 1 and 2, the provisions mandate the State to give
social justice the highest priority to promote equality in the social,
economic and political life of the nation through the redistribution
of our resources, wealth and power for the greater good. 176
Further in the deliberations, Commissioner Bennagen remarked
on the aspects of social justice, viz:
MR. BENNAGEN: x x x x
We did not fail to incorporate aspects of attitudinal change, as
well as structural change, and these are fairly evident in the first
two sections. As indicated in Section 1, we did emphasize that
social justice should be a social, economic, political and moral
imperative. The moral component is important because we feel
that a justice provision should be on the side of the poor, the
disadvantaged, the so-called deprived and the oppressed. This is
a point that has been raised a number of times especially by
social scientists. Specifically, I would like to mention Dr. Mahar
Mangahas who, in his extensive studies on social justice, feels
that the State itself has been a major source of injustice and that,
therefore, the State should be able to correct that and must
assume a moral stance in relation to the poor, the deprived and
the oppressed, a moral stance that we feel should also permeate
the bureaucracy, the technocracy and eventually, with the
changes in structures, also the whole of our Philippine
society.177 (Emphasis ours)
Pursuant to the ends discussed by the framers of the Constitution,
they came up with Article XIII which specifically deals with Social
Justice and Human Rights. Section 1, Article XIII of the
Constitution carries the positive command to the Congress to
uphold social justice. It reads:
Section 1. The Congress shall give highest priority to the
enactment of measures that protect and enhance the right of all
the people to human dignity, reduce social, economic and political
we would like very much for the sectors to be there. That is why
one of the ways to do that is to put a ceiling on the number of
representatives from any single party that can sit within the 50
allocated under the party list system. x x x.
xxx
MR. MONSOD. Madam President, the candidacy for the 198 seats
is not limited to political parties. My question is this: Are we going
to classify for example Christian Democrats and Social Democrats
as political parties? Can they run under the party list concept or
must they be under the district legislation side of it only?
MR. VILLACORTA. In reply to that query, I think these parties that
the Commissioner mentioned can field candidates for the Senate
as well as for the House of Representatives. Likewise, they can
also field sectoral candidates for the 20 percent or 30 percent,
whichever is adopted, of the seats that we are allocating under
the party list system.
MR. MONSOD. In other words, the Christian Democrats can field
district candidates and can also participate in the party list
system?
MR. VILLACORTA. Why not? When they come to the party list
system, they will be fielding only sectoral candidates.
MR. MONSOD. May I be clarified on that? Can UNIDO participate in
the party list system?
MR. VILLACORTA. Yes, why not? For as long as they field
candidates who come from the different marginalized sectors that
we shall designate in this Constitution.
MR. MONSOD. Suppose Senator Taada wants to run under BAYAN
group and says that he represents the farmers, would he qualify?
MR. VILLACORTA. No, Senator Taada would not qualify.
MR. MONSOD. But UNIDO can field candidates under the party list
system and say Juan dela Cruz is a farmer. Who would pass on
whether he is a farmer or not?
MR. TADEO. Kay Commissioner Monsod, gusto ko lamang linawin
ito. Political parties, particularly minority political parties, are not
prohibited to participate in the party list election if they can prove
that they are also organized along sectoral lines.
MR. MONSOD. What the Commissioner is saying is that all political
parties can participate because it is precisely the contention of
political parties that they represent the broad base of citizens and
that all sectors are represented in them. Would the Commissioner
agree?
MR. TADEO. Ang punto lamang namin, pag pinayagan mo ang
UNIDO na isang political party, it will dominate the party list at
mawawalang saysay din yung sector. Lalamunin mismo ng
political parties ang party list system. Gusto ko lamang bigyan ng
diin ang "reserve." Hindi ito reserve seat sa marginalized sectors.
Kung titingnan natin itong 198 seats, reserved din ito sa political
parties.
MR. MONSOD. Hindi po reserved iyon kasi anybody can run there.
But my question to Commissioner Villacorta and probably also to
Commissioner Tadeo is that under this system, would UNIDO be
banned from running under the party list system?
MR. VILLACORTA. No, as I said, UNIDO may field sectoral
candidates. On that condition alone, UNIDO may be allowed to
register for the party list system.
MR. MONSOD. May I inquire from Commissioner Tadeo if he shares
that answer?
MR. TADEO. The same.
MR. VILLACORTA. Puwede po ang UNIDO, pero sa sectoral
lines.189 (Emphasis supplied)
xxxx
Fifth, the party or organization must not be an adjunct of, or a
project organized or an entity funded or assisted by, the
government. By the very nature of the party-list system, the party
or organization must be a group of citizens, organized by citizens
and operated by citizens. x x x195
To be eligible for registration, the party, organization or coalition
must prove that it possesses all the qualifications and none of the
disqualifications stated in the law. The grounds for disqualification
stated in Section 6 of RA 7941 pertain to acts, status or conditions
which render the applicant group an unsuitable partner of the
state in alleviating the conditions of the marginalized and
underrepresented. These disqualifying circumstances are drawn
to further implement the state policy of preserving the party-list
system exclusively for the intended beneficiaries of RA 7941.
On the other hand, the disqualification mentioned in the fifth
guideline connotes that the party-list group must maintain its
independence from the government so that it may be able to
pursue its causes without undue interference or any other
extraneous considerations. Verily, the group is expected to
organize and operate on its own. It must derive its life from its
own resources and must not owe any part of its creation to the
government or any of its instrumentalities. By maintaining its
independence, the group creates a shield that no influence or
semblance of influence can penetrate and obstruct the group
from achieving its purposes. In the end, the party-list group is
able to effectively represent the causes of the marginalized and
underrepresented, particularly in the formulation of legislation
intended for the benefit of the sectors.
Qualifications of the Nominees
The sixth, seventh and eighth guidelines in Ang Bagong Bayani
bear on the qualifications of the nominees, viz:
Sixth, the party must not only comply with the requirements of
the law; its nominees must likewise do so. Section 9 of RA 7941
reads as follows:
SEC. 9. Qualifications of Party-List Nominees. No person shall
be nominated as party-list representative unless he is a naturalborn citizen of the Philippines, a registered voter, a resident of the
Philippines for a period of not less than one (1) year immediately
preceding the day of the election, able to read and write, a bona
fide member of the party or organization which he seeks to
represent for at least ninety (90) days preceding the day of the
election, and is at least twenty-five (25) years of age on the day
of the election.
In case of a nominee of the youth sector, he must at least be
twenty-five (25) but not more than thirty (30) years of age on the
day of the election. Any youth sectoral representative who attains
the age of thirty (30) during his term shall be allowed to continue
in office until the expiration of his term."
Seventh, not only the candidate party or organization must
represent marginalized and underrepresented sectors; so also
must its nominees. To repeat, under Section 2 of RA 7941, the
nominees must be Filipino citizens "who belong to marginalized
and underrepresented sectors, organizations and parties." Surely,
the interests of the youth cannot be fully represented by a retiree;
neither can those of the urban poor or the working class, by an
industrialist. To allow otherwise is to betray the State policy to
give genuine representation to the marginalized and
underrepresented.
Eighth, as previously discussed, while lacking a well-defined
political constituency, the nominee must likewise be able to
contribute to the formulation and enactment of appropriate
legislation that will benefit the nation as a whole. x x x 196
Except for a few, the basic qualifications of the nominee are
practically the same as those required of individual candidates for
election to the House of Representatives. He must be: (a) a
natural-born citizen; (b) a registered voter; (c) a resident of the
Philippines for a period of not less than one (1) year immediately
preceding the day of the election; (d) able to read and write; (e)
bona fide member of the party or organization which he seeks to
represent for at least ninety (90) days before the day of election;
(f) at least twenty five (25) years of age on the day of election; (g)
in case of a nominee for the youth sector, he must at least be
twenty-five (25) but not more than thirty (30) years of age on the
day of election. Owing to the peculiarity of the party-list system of
representation, it is not required that the nominee be a resident
or a registered voter of a particular district since it is the party-list
group that is voted for and not the appointed nominees. He must,
however, be a bona fide member of the party-list group at least
ninety (90) days before the elections.
The nominee must be a bona fide member of the marginalized
and underrepresented sector
In some of the petitions, the COMELEC denied registration to the
party, organization or coalition on the ground that the nominee
does not belong to the sector he wishes to represent. The
quandary stems from the interpretation of who are considered as
one "belonging to the marginalized and underrepresented." The
COMELEC supposed that before a person may be considered as
one "belonging to the marginalized and underrepresented sector,"
he must actually share with the rest of the membership that
common characteristic or attribute which makes the sector
marginalized and underrepresented.
The construction seemed logical but to be consistent with the
letter of the law, it must be harmonized with Section 9 of RA
7941, the specific provision dealing with the qualifications of the
nominee. In the mentioned provision, aside from the qualifications
similarly required of candidates seeking to represent their
respective districts, the nominee is required to be a bona fide
member of the party, a status he acquires when he enters into
the membership of the organization for at least ninety (90) days
before the election. From the point in time when the person
acquires the status of being a bona fide member, he becomes one
"belonging to the marginalized and underrepresented sector."
AT
AT is an incumbent party-list group that claims to represent six
(6) marginalized sectors labor, urban poor, elderly, women,
youth and overseas Filipino workers (OFWs). 220 In disqualifying AT,
the COMELEC found that its incumbent representative,
Congresswoman Daryl Grace J. Abayon, failed to author house
measures that will uplift the welfare of all the sectors it claims to
represent.221
In so ruling, however, the COMELEC gravely abused its discretion
in failing to appreciate that effective representation of sectors is
not confined to the passage of bills that directly identify or name
all of the sectors it seeks to represent. In the case of AT, there is
evidence that it adopted and co-sponsored House Bills that
advanced the interests, not only of the sectors it represents, but
even other marginalized and underrepresented sectors. 222 AT also
established with sufficiency an exceptional track record that
demonstrates its genuine desire to uplift the welfare of all of the
sectors it represents.223 It is broad enough to cover legislation
which, while directly identifying only some of the sectors as main
beneficiaries, also benefits the rest of the sectors it seeks to
represent.
ARARO
ARARO is a party-list group that seeks to represent peasants and
the urban poor. It was disqualified by the COMELEC on the ground
that these two sectors involve conflicting interests, for instance, in
the matter of land use.
However, I do not see, and the COMELEC failed to show, how the
issue of land use can be conflicting between these sectors.
Peasants generally belong to the class of marginal farmers,
fisherfolk and laborers in the rural areas. On the other hand, the
urban poor, as the term connotes, are those in the urban areas.
While they may have different interests and concerns, these are
not necessarily divergent.
A-IPRA,
AKIN,
Party-List
A
and
that
are
organized
as
national
the
following
are
regional
L.
REYES
Footnotes
Ang Bagong Bayani-OFW Labor Party vs. Commission on
Elections, 412 Phil. 308 (2001).
1
of Party-List
System, and
Supra note 1.
10
11
13
15
16
17
18
Melchor P. Maramara.
19
20
21
Id. at 60.
22
23
24
25
27
28
29
30
31
Id.
32
33
35
37
39
41
42
Id. at 28.
43
45
46
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
57
58
61
62
64
65
66
68
70
72
74
75
76
Alvin V. Abejuela.
78
80
81
83
85
87
88
90
92
94
95
97
99
101
103
105
106
107
Id at 133.
108
109
111
112
113
116
117
118
119
Imelda S. Quirante.
120
Flordeliza P. Penalosa.
122
125
126
127
128
Rolex T. Suplico.
129
Francis G. Lavilla.
131
135
136
138
140
141
142
143
Supra note 1.
144
145
Id. at 709-710.
146
148
151
153
154
Id. at 369-370.
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
170
172
173
Id. at 19.
177
Ibid.
178
179
180
Id. at 333.
184
Ibid.
185
Id. at 336-337.
187
189
Id. at 247-248.
191
192
195
Id. at 343-344.
196
Id. at 345.
197
198
Ibid.
xxxx
5. It violates or fails to comply with laws, rules and
regulations relating to elections;
xxxx
Lokin, Jr. v. Commission on Elections, G.R. Nos. 179431-32
and 180443, June 22, 2010, 621 SCRA 385, 409.
200
203
acts
of
terrorism
to
enhance
his
207
208
Id. at 424.
209
210
Section 2, RA 7941.
212
213
214
Id. at 766-767.
215
Id. at 767.
216
217
218
219
Id. at 77-79.
220
221
Id. at 160.
222
Id. at 544-613.
223
Id. at 839-1494.
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
We should read article VI, section 5 (1) and (2) in the light of
these overarching consideration.
Article VI, section 5(1) provides:
"(1) The House of Representative shall be composed of not more
than two hundred and fifty members, unless otherwise fixed by
law, who shall be elected from legislative districts apportioned
among the provinces, cities, and the Metropolitan Manila area in
accordance with the number of their respective inhabitants, and
those who, as provided by law, shall be elected through a party
list system of registered national, regional and sectoral parties or
organizations." (emphasis provided)
There are two types of representatives in the House of
Representatives. Those in the first group are "elected from
legislative districts". Those in the second group are "elected
through a party list system of registered national, regional and
sectoral parties and organizations."
The differences in terms of representation are clear.
Those who are elected from legislative districts will have their
name in the ballot. They present their persons as the potential
agent of their electorate. It is their individual qualifications that
will be assessed by COMELEC on the basis of the Constitution and
relevant statutes. Should there be disqualification it would be
their personal circumstances, which will be reviewed, in the
proper case, by the House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal
(HRET). The individual representative can lose subsequent
elections for various reasons, including dissatisfaction from those
that initially elected him/her into office.
Incidentally, those who present themselves for election by
legislative districts may or may not be supported by a registered
political party. This may give them added political advantages in
the electoral exercise, which includes the goodwill, reputation and
resources of the major political party they affiliate with. However,
it is not the nature of the political party that endorses them that is
"The foregoing provision on the party list system is not selfexecutory. It is, in fact, interspersed with phrases like in
accordance with law or as may be provided by law; it was thus
up to Congress to sculpt in granite the lofty objective of the
Constitution."25
The 1987 Constitution is a complete document. Every provision
should be read in the context of all the other provisions so that
contours of constitutional policy are made clear. 26 To claim that
the framers of the Constitution left it to Congress to complete the
very framework of the party list system is to question the
fundamental character of our constitution. The phrases "in
accordance with law" and "as may be provided by law" is not an
invitation to the members of Congress to continue the work of the
constituent assembly that crafted the Constitution. Constitutional
policy is to be derived from the text of the constitution in the light
of its context in the document and considering the contemporary
impact of relevant precedents.
From constitutional policy, Congress then details the workings of
the policy through law. The Constitution remains the fundamental
and basic law with a more dominant interpretative position vis-avis statute. It has no equal within our normative system.
Article VI, sections 5 (1) and (2) already imply a complete
Constitutional framework for the party list system.
Congress
cannot
add
the
concept
of
"proportional
representation". Congress cannot pass a law so that we read in
the text of the Constitution the requirement that even national
and regional parties or organizations should likewise be sectoral.
Certainly Congress cannot pass a law so that even the one-half
that was not reserved for sectoral representatives even during the
first three consecutive terms after the ratification of the
Constitution should now only be composed of sectoral
representatives.
There were strong cogent dissenting opinions coming from
Justices Mendoza and Vitug when Ang Bagong Bayani v. COMELEC
was decided in 2001.27 Only six (6) justices concurred with the
by
"marginalized
and
"Sec. 17. The Senate and the House of Representatives shall each
have a Electoral Tribunal which shall be the sole judge of all
contests relating to the election, returns, and qualifications of
their respective Members..."
A more specific provision in the Constitution with respect to
disqualifying registered political party list groups should prevail
over the more general powers of the COMELEC to enforce and
administer election laws. Besides, that the HRET is the "sole
judge" clearly shows that the constitutional intention is to exclude
all the rest.52
WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, I vote to:
1. GRANT the Petitions and NULLIFY COMELEC Resolution No.
9135 and all the COMELEC Resolutions raised in these
consolidated cases; and
2. REMAND the cases to COMELEC for proper proceedings in
line with our decision.
MARVIC
MARION
Associate Justice
VICTOR
F.
LEONEN
Footnotes
1
G.R. No. 179271, April 21, 2009. 586 SCRA 211. But, by a
vote of 8 joining the opinion of Puno, C.J. the court upheld
Veterans disallowing political parties from participating in the
party list elections.
4
Supra note 2.
See for instance, Lande, Carl H., Parties and Politics in the
Philippines, Asian Survey, Vol. 8, No. 9 (Sep 1968) pp 725747 or Teehankee, Julio, Electoral Politics in the Philippines,
in Electoral Politics in Southeast Asia, Aurel Croissant,
ed.,Friedrich Ebert Stiftung, 2002.
11
13
14
15
Id.
16
17
18
Supra note 2.
21
22
23
Supra note 2.
24
25
26
27
COMELEC Resolution dated October 20, 2012, SPP No. 12154 (PLM) and SPP No. 12-177 (PLM), G.R. No. 203818 (Ako
Bikol Political Party, AKB).
30
COMELEC Resolution dated November 28, 2012, SPP 12136 (PLM), G.R. No. 204356 (BUTIL)
37
COMELEC Resolution dated December 5, 2012, SPP 11002, G.R. No. 204484 (PBB)
38
COMELEC Resolution dated November 23, 2012, SPP 12099, G.R. No. 204379 (ASIN)
39
COMELEC Resolution dated November 29, 2012, SPP 12011 (PP), G.R. No. 204370 (AAB)
40
42
43
44
See for instance, Iris Marion Young, Justice and the Politics
of Difference, (2011).
45
46
47
Supra note 4.
49
50
Supra note 2.
51
Supra note 4.